ReviewWorld journal of plastic surgery2023
Prevalence of Bifid Mandibular Canal: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in World journal of plastic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A customised 3D U-Net model for bifid mandibular canal segmentation and detection on CBCT: a diagnostic accuracy study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Bifid mandibular canals: anatomical variations and morphometric analysis based on a modified CBCT classification.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
- Cone beam computed tomographic evaluation of temporal crest canal in the Turkish population.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Anatomical Characteristics of Bifid and Trifid Mandibular Canals: A Computer Tomography Analysis.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2024Article
- Long-term Stable Unilateral Mandibular Deformity Associated With Ipsilateral Skull-base Soft-tissue Lesion and Degenerated Pterygoid Muscles in Neurofibromatosis Type 1.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of bifid mandibular canal (BMC) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic images through meta-analysis. Methods: Databases of Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched to find the relevant studies. Studies the met the inclusion criteria were selected. Variables of prevalence, side, length and diameter of BMC and sex were assessed. Data was analyzed using STATA software version 17. Results: Of the 1164 articles initially selected, 36 were enrolled. A total of 38077 patients were considered. The overall prevalence of BMC was 18.0%. Studies that evaluated CBCT images reported higher prevalence of BMC compared to panoramic images (25.0% vs 3.0%). The prevalence of BMC was higher in men than women and slightly higher in right side than the left side of the jaw, but none of those differences were significant. Conclusion: The results have shown a total prevalence of 18.0% for BMC. Detection power of CBCT images were higher than panoramics. There was no significant relation between prevalence of BMC with sex or side of the jaw.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.